Managing Phosphorus Availability from Organic and Inorganic Sources for Optimum Wheat Production in Calcareous Soils
, Muhammad Ishaq 1, Wajid Ali Shah 1, Muhammad Adnan 2,*, Shah Fahad 3,4,*, Muhammad Hamzah Saleem 5,*, Fahim Ullah Khan 6, Maria Mussarat 7, Shadman Khan 7, Baber Ali 8, Yasser S. Mostafa 9, Saad Alamri 9 and Mohamed Hashem 9,10
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is well planned and executed. The results and discussion part is good.
However, authors advocating a blanket application of fertilizers to wheat crop by mentioning 100% SSP along with 10 t of FYM. The blanket application across all states in Pakistan may not be appropriate. Hence from the policy point of view authors consider to mention the use of Soil Health card type of instrument for suggesting RD of fertilizer.
The SHCs across the world distributed to the farmers after testing their soils along with suitable fertilizer use recommendations. For details see a paper on “Reddy, A. A. (2019). The Soil Health Card Scheme in India: Lessons Learned and Challenges for Replication in Other Developing Countries. Journal of Natural Resources Policy Research, 9(2), 124-156” and also Patra, A. K., Dutta, S. K., Dey, P., Majumdar, K., & Sanyal, S. K. (2017). Potassium fertility status of Indian soils: national soil health card database highlights the increasing potassium deficit in soils. Indian Journal of Fertilisers, 13(11), 28-33.
Finally, there is a need for correcting English language. Some examples are given below.
Line 49, year of application.
Line 57, who cannot afford
Line 62-64: However, introduction of organic materials may eliminate P 62 loss from applied P fertilizers due to leaching, thereby reducing the risk of contamination 63 from P in water [22,23].
Line 69-70: language error.
Line 78: in in
Line 97: en to maintain
Figure 1, explain clearly fg, e-g etc
Author Response
The paper is well planned and executed. The results and discussion part is good.
However, authors advocating a blanket application of fertilizers to wheat crop by mentioning 100% SSP along with 10 t of FYM. The blanket application across all states in Pakistan may not be appropriate. Hence from the policy point of view authors consider to mention the use of Soil Health card type of instrument for suggesting RD of fertilizer.
The SHCs across the world distributed to the farmers after testing their soils along with suitable fertilizer use recommendations. For details see a paper on “Reddy, A. A. (2019). The Soil Health Card Scheme in India: Lessons Learned and Challenges for Replication in Other Developing Countries. Journal of Natural Resources Policy Research, 9(2), 124-156” and also Patra, A. K., Dutta, S. K., Dey, P., Majumdar, K., & Sanyal, S. K. (2017). Potassium fertility status of Indian soils: national soil health card database highlights the increasing potassium deficit in soils. Indian Journal of Fertilisers, 13(11), 28-33.
Response: I agree with you that the application of organic manures especially FYM shall be based on proper soil testing. However, the Pakistan’s soils are very poor in organic matter (<1%) due to higher rate of decomposition and less vegetation/accumulation. That’s why, the blanket application also responds well whenever applied. Its application no only improves soil chemical fertility but optimizes soil physical and biological fertility as well.
Finally, there is a need for correcting English language. Some examples are given below.
Line 49, year of application.
Response: 1st year of application
Line 57, who cannot afford
Response: For poor farmers who cannot afford commercially available P fertilizers
Line 62-64: However, introduction of organic materials may eliminate P 62 loss from applied P fertilizers due to leaching, thereby reducing the risk of contamination 63 from P in water [22,23].
Response: The sentence was rephrased.
Line 69-70: language error.
Response: The sentence was rephrased.
Line 78: in in
Response: Amended as suggested.
Line 97: en to maintain
Response: Rectified as advised.
Figure 1, explain clearly fg, e-g etc
Response: It represents statistical lettering. It has already been explained in figure captions that “Bar chart with different letters are significantly different at α=0.05”. The same has been done for the rest of the figures as well.
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript submitted for review contains an interesting research problem, but I have a few comments about it:
L 66-67: what about legumes?
Please note the abbreviations used. Please expand (describe) them in the first place in the manuscript, and then use them in the rest of the manuscript.
Is it a one-year experience?
Was K fertilization used?
Please describe the experimental design in more detail. In particular, please pay attention to the description of individual factors, individual fertilization, the amount of ingredients used per ha of cultivation, n =? e.t.c.
When providing data, it would be useful to include the value of the standard deviation
In the text, the authors mention the creation of a thesis, please delete.
Conclusions are written unclearly. Please correct, referring in detail to the obtained research results.
Author Response
The manuscript submitted for review contains an interesting research problem, but I have a few comments about it:
L 66-67: what about legumes?
Response: Rectified as advised.
Please note the abbreviations used. Please expand (describe) them in the first place in the manuscript, and then use them in the rest of the manuscript.
Response: The abbreviations used for the first time were properly explained across the manuscript.
Is it a one-year experience?
Response: Yes, this is a one year study.
Was K fertilization used?
Response: Yes, Basal dose of K at the rate of 60 kg K2O ha-1 (inclusive of K obtained from organic sources) was applied to all the plots.
Please describe the experimental design in more detail. In particular, please pay attention to the description of individual factors, individual fertilization, the amount of ingredients used per ha of cultivation, n =? e.t.c.
Response: The statistical analysis section has been properly revised. Furthermore, the results were also corrected as advised.
When providing data, it would be useful to include the value of the standard deviation.
Response: Yes I agree but we have supported our data with statistical lettering.
In the text, the authors mention the creation of a thesis, please delete.
Response: Rectified as suggested.
Conclusions are written unclearly. Please correct, referring in detail to the obtained research results.
Response: Revised and corrected as advised.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors, thank you for responding to my comments. However, I have one more uniformity. Namely, your research is a one-year field study. Typically, a minimum of 2-3 years of research is needed to draw conclusions from field trials. For example, it suggests a reference in the content to why the research was so short, whether it will be continued, and that the conclusions should be confirmed by further research.
Author Response
Dear Editor
Sustainability (MDPI)
Subject: Response to reviewer comment Manuscript ID: sustainability-1742014
Dear Editor,
The subject manuscript has been revised as track changes (highlighted yellow). The response to the honorable reviewer's comment is as follows:
Comment
Dear Authors, thank you for responding to my comments. However, I have one more uniformity. Namely, your research is a one-year field study. Typically, a minimum of 2-3 years of research is needed to draw conclusions from field trials. For example, it suggests a reference in the content to why the research was so short, whether it will be continued, and that the conclusions should be confirmed by further research.
Response:
This study is a component of our three years project. These are the findings of the 1st-year experiment and we are further verifying these findings. Therefore, the conclusion has been rectified by including the statement “However, these findings shall be further verified at diverse agro-climatic conditions in long term field trials before formulating countrywide recommendations”.
Kindly process it and obliged.
Regards
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
